1 2025:CGHC:32548 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1931 of 2021 1 - Smt. Sharda Soni W/o S.K. Soni, Aged About 59 Years President Sharda Kala Niketan, Distt. Baloda Bazar (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Special Duty Officer, Women And Child Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.S.- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Joint Director, Women And Child Develpoment, Nawa Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - District Program Officer, Women And Child Development Department, Baloda Bazaar, Distt. Baloda Bazaar (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri N.K. Chatterjee, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Vedant Shadangi, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 14.07.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this petition filed by the Petitioner and be pleased to make an to set aside the order dated 22-02-2021 and be please to make an order dated to make a detailed SMT NIRMALA RAO -2- examination of the application forwarded by the petitioner for the purpose of grant of recognition of the Sharda Kala Niketan for the purpose of the approval of the case and the Hon'ble Court be also be pleased to provide the proper opportunity to the Petitioner. 10.2 Any other relief as deem fit and proper by this Hon'ble in the facts and circumstances of the petition may kindly be passed.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that an application was moved by the petitioner for grant of recognition to the institution Sharda Kala Niketan, but the same was rejected by the State vide order dated 22.2.2021. He would contend that the petitioner may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before the concerned authority, and that the said authority may be directed to consider it. He would further submit that the petitioner’s institution has since improved, and all required activities are now being conducted. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that the earlier application moved by the petitioner has already been rejected and therefore, no such direction can be issued until the order (Annexure-P/2) dated 22.2.2021 is set aside. 4. Heard. 5. A perusal of Annexure-P/2 reveals that the application moved by the petitioner for grant of affiliation, recognition and financial assistance was rejected on the ground that the required activities 3 were not being carried out in the institution. 6. Taking into consideration the submission made by counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation/ application before respondent No.1. The competent authority is directed to consider and decide the same expeditiously and in an objective manner, in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observation, this petition is disposed of at admission stage. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi